Ray wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Ray wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Ray
wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Tim+ wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Ray

wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
alan_m wrote:

On 24/01/2020 13:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:21:17 +0000, alan_m

wrote:

How can they claim no added sugars when one of their products
is
labelled unsweetened?

You aren't very bright are you?

"* contains naturally occurring sugars"

So why the label unsweetened on one carton and not the other
two?
Naturally occurring sugar added to two products and not the
other?

You do seem to be lacking some knowledge about how food
labelling
works. Call sugar something else and add a label saying no added
sugar.

Soya (or other grain such as oats) contains vey ltiile free
sugar,
but
apple joice is added to the not-unsweetened one. Which does
contain
various sweet-tasting sugers.

Why a purely mechanical extract of suigar cane is not "natural"
is
a
bit of a mystery to me

Yep.

- especially as olive oil is obtained by a rather
similar process, and is, apparently, natural.

AFAiCS the only thing that is not "natural" is witchcraft.

But its hard to claim that whats done to produce reasonably
spreadable margarine is particularly natural.

You could say that about butter if you were so inclined.

Take cream, shake, add salt. Pretty sure that's a long way off
margarine
production.

Leave out the salt.

No thanks, its much more natural than breeding cows to
produce lots of milk when they arent calving and drinking
what humans wouldn't naturally be consuming after about
the age of 12 months or so, let alone making butter from it.

Ah, so you are agreeing with me that butter is no more natural than
margarine.

No I am not. Churning and salt is nothing even remotely
like the hydrogenation of liquid fats from plants to make
a spreadable margarine. In spades when comparing olive
oil with margarine.

I don't think they hydrogenate oil to make margarine any more.

There is no other way to make oils into a spreadable margarine.

It has become medically unfashionable. They instead
use higher melting point fats in the first place,

Not possible when most of what comes from plants are oils.

chiefly the ecologically disastrous (allegedly) palm oil.

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

Read your own reference:

" For this reason, partially hardened fats are used less and less in the
margarine industry. Some tropical oils, such as palm oil and coconut
oil, are naturally semi-solid and do not require hydrogenation."

--

Roger Hayter

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 08:04:47 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

You REALLY got NOTHING in your senile and perverted "life" other than what
goes on on these groups, eh, you lonesome sleepless cantankerous senile
pest? I mean REALLY!!! It's just so obvious, you abnormal cretin! LOL

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Saturday, 25 January 2020 21:16:51 UTC, Ray wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...


I don't think they hydrogenate oil to make margarine any more.

There is no other way to make oils into a spreadable margarine.

It has become medically unfashionable. They instead
use higher melting point fats in the first place,

Not possible when most of what comes from plants are oils.

chiefly the ecologically disastrous (allegedly) palm oil.

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

says:
Three types of margarine are common:
Bottled liquid margarine to cook or top dishes.
Soft vegetable fat spreads, high in mono- or polyunsaturated fats, which are made from safflower, sunflower, soybean, cottonseed, rapeseed, or olive oil.
Hard, generally uncolored margarine for cooking or baking. (Shortening)

Never heard or seen of the 1st. The 3rd I've not seen in decades.


NT

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Ray wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Ray wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Ray

wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Tim+ wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Ray

wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
alan_m wrote:

On 24/01/2020 13:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:21:17 +0000, alan_m

wrote:

How can they claim no added sugars when one of their
products
is
labelled unsweetened?

You aren't very bright are you?

"* contains naturally occurring sugars"

So why the label unsweetened on one carton and not the other
two?
Naturally occurring sugar added to two products and not the
other?

You do seem to be lacking some knowledge about how food
labelling
works. Call sugar something else and add a label saying no
added
sugar.

Soya (or other grain such as oats) contains vey ltiile free
sugar,
but
apple joice is added to the not-unsweetened one. Which does
contain
various sweet-tasting sugers.

Why a purely mechanical extract of suigar cane is not
"natural"
is
a
bit of a mystery to me

Yep.

- especially as olive oil is obtained by a rather
similar process, and is, apparently, natural.

AFAiCS the only thing that is not "natural" is witchcraft.

But its hard to claim that whats done to produce reasonably
spreadable margarine is particularly natural.

You could say that about butter if you were so inclined.

Take cream, shake, add salt. Pretty sure that's a long way off
margarine
production.

Leave out the salt.

No thanks, its much more natural than breeding cows to
produce lots of milk when they arent calving and drinking
what humans wouldn't naturally be consuming after about
the age of 12 months or so, let alone making butter from it.

Ah, so you are agreeing with me that butter is no more natural than
margarine.

No I am not. Churning and salt is nothing even remotely
like the hydrogenation of liquid fats from plants to make
a spreadable margarine. In spades when comparing olive
oil with margarine.

I don't think they hydrogenate oil to make margarine any more.

There is no other way to make oils into a spreadable margarine.

It has become medically unfashionable. They instead
use higher melting point fats in the first place,

Not possible when most of what comes from plants are oils.

chiefly the ecologically disastrous (allegedly) palm oil.

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

Read your own reference:

" For this reason, partially hardened fats are used less and less in the
margarine industry. Some tropical oils, such as palm oil and coconut
oil, are naturally semi-solid and do not require hydrogenation."

But that isnt what is used in most current spreadable margarines.

And trivial to see that from the nutrient list, palm oil is
high in saturated fat and few spreadable margarines
are high in saturated fat now.

wrote in message
...
On Saturday, 25 January 2020 21:16:51 UTC, Ray wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...


I don't think they hydrogenate oil to make margarine any more.

There is no other way to make oils into a spreadable margarine.

It has become medically unfashionable. They instead
use higher melting point fats in the first place,

Not possible when most of what comes from plants are oils.

chiefly the ecologically disastrous (allegedly) palm oil.

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

says:
Three types of margarine are common:
Bottled liquid margarine to cook or top dishes.
Soft vegetable fat spreads, high in mono- or polyunsaturated fats,
which are made from safflower, sunflower, soybean, cottonseed, rapeseed,
or olive oil.
Hard, generally uncolored margarine for cooking or baking. (Shortening)

Never heard or seen of the 1st.

The 3rd I've not seen in decades.

Still buyable here. We never called it margarine.

I used to use it when roasting legs of lamb but
dont anymore, I do the legs of lamb in glass
convection ovens with no fat at all except
what comes from the leg itself.

I used to do the potatoes in the shortening
when I used it but now do the in a digital
air fryer dipped in olive oil after peeling.

wrote:

On Saturday, 25 January 2020 21:16:51 UTC, Ray wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...


I don't think they hydrogenate oil to make margarine any more.

There is no other way to make oils into a spreadable margarine.

It has become medically unfashionable. They instead
use higher melting point fats in the first place,

Not possible when most of what comes from plants are oils.

chiefly the ecologically disastrous (allegedly) palm oil.

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

says: Three types of margarine are common: Bottled liquid margarine to
cook or top dishes. Soft vegetable fat spreads, high in mono- or
polyunsaturated fats, which are made from safflower, sunflower, soybean,
cottonseed, rapeseed, or olive oil. Hard, generally uncolored margarine
for cooking or baking. (Shortening)

Never heard or seen of the 1st. The 3rd I've not seen in decades.


NT
Trex. In a supermarket near you.

--

Roger Hayter

On 24 Jan 2020 at 13:40:04 GMT, "T i m" wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:21:17 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 24/01/2020 10:30, T i m wrote:

Then that depends on the overall footprint of each.

eg, It could well be that the 'fake milk' requires a faction of the
space to produce (compared with cows milk), a fraction of the water
and actually produces far less of the worst greenhouse gasses (methane
V CO2), then we may all still be better off overall (and no cow
hormones in fake milk for example).

https://www.alpro.com/uk/products/drinks/oat-drinks/oat-original/



How can they claim no added sugars when one of their products is
labelled unsweetened?

You aren't very bright are you?

"* contains naturally occurring sugars"

Do you think they *add* lactose to cows milk?

(And they let these people vote ... rolls eyes). ;-(


Factor in the destruction of the soil structure by constantly growing
crops.

Of course.

Leaving the ground fallow and growing grass for a couple of years
and then using grazing animals for maintenance during this time may be
beneficial for the country.

But it may not, if grazing animals (even if also for milk or meat
production) takes up say 20x the land in the first place and produce
loads more methane (than say a combine harvester produces CO2).

True, and it's the land (put into) use that really hits with dairy:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46654042

Cheers, Rob

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:25:40 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


But that isnt what is used in most current spreadable margarines.

And trivial to see that from the nutrient list, palm oil is
high in saturated fat and few spreadable margarines
are high in saturated fat now.

Are you quarrelling about margarines now, you clinically insane lonely
senile pest? LOL

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:33:14 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Still buyable here. We never called it margarine.

STILL quarrelling about margarine, you clinically insane trolling senile
pest? LOL

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 22/01/2020 14:14, whisky-dave wrote:


I've not been in McDonalds since 1993 and even then it was only because
a GF likked a McDonalds breakfast. 2003 was the last time I went
in a chain burger bar (burger king), and not been in a KFC type place since around 1987.

So where do you go for a ****?



--
Adam

T i m wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 12:08:50 +0000, Tim Lamb


The answer of course is that some people buy bottled water because
they think it's better for them, are too lazy to re-fill an existing
bottle or think it tastes better (when where they have done blind
tests, 'most people' prefer tap water). ;-)

What a mad world we live in ...

Maybe theyre right? Tap water might not be as safe as weve long
supposed.

https://www.doctorshealthpress.com/c...ladder-cancer/

Tim+

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 26 Jan 2020 09:36:49 GMT, Tim+ wrote:

T i m wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 12:08:50 +0000, Tim Lamb


The answer of course is that some people buy bottled water because
they think it's better for them, are too lazy to re-fill an existing
bottle or think it tastes better (when where they have done blind
tests, 'most people' prefer tap water). ;-)

What a mad world we live in ...

Maybe they’re right? Tap water might not be as safe as we’ve long
supposed.

I think the point is that 'our' tap water is often better than in many
other countries (where drinking bottled water *is* advised for health
reasons) and often safer than drinking water from other sources (like
a stream etc). However, this does raise some questions that it says in
your link do require further study.

https://www.doctorshealthpress.com/c...ladder-cancer/


"An interesting finding was that drinking chlorinated water was less
risky than bathing or swimming in it."

I wonder if swimming in a chlorinated swimming pool is safer than
swimming in the sea?

Are you less vulnerable by taking a bath / shower of you have a stored
water system (where the chlorine can evaporate) over an instant
(electric / combi) one?

Cheers, T i m

In message , T i m
writes
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 15:06:03 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 25/01/2020 09:52, T i m wrote:

As does the money they earn for the school for doing so.

But you knew that didn't you?

It probably cost more (salary + materials) for a teacher to supervise,
package up 5kg of crisp wrappers, print out a postage label and contact
the carrier than the school gets back from Walkers.

If you cost such things that way or are you just scraping the bottom
of the barrel now? How much 'supervision' do you think such a thing
would take, if it's supervised at all. And why a teacher, why not a
student, parent or other volunteer? Have you never been to a school
fundraising thing and seen how much work they often do just to raise a
tenner?

approx 2200 empty packets = 5kg minimum weight package to send to
Walkers for rewards = £10

Yup and with a secondary school with ~1000 students, and people using
it as a drop off point, how long before it's way more than 5kg?

Why are you so against this?

I'm not against it as such but believe the level of effort involved
could be better directed.
Is there nothing that that number of man,women,child hours could be
applied to which would save more of the planet?

Walkers should promote whoever is responsible! Better yet, lets us make
them prime minister:-)

--
Tim Lamb

On 26/01/2020 00:08, wrote:
On Saturday, 25 January 2020 21:16:51 UTC, Ray wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...


I don't think they hydrogenate oil to make margarine any more.

There is no other way to make oils into a spreadable margarine.

It has become medically unfashionable. They instead
use higher melting point fats in the first place,

Not possible when most of what comes from plants are oils.

chiefly the ecologically disastrous (allegedly) palm oil.

Palm oil is used in some cooking but isnt what margarine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margar...turing_process

says:
Three types of margarine are common:
Bottled liquid margarine to cook or top dishes.

You mean like Stork Baking Liquid or Flora Cuisine? I don't think either
is available now. Do you know a substitute currently available in the
UK? (Good for making fairy cakes as they're easy to mix by hand.)

--
Max Demian

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 10:19:57 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

snip


Why are you so against this?

I'm not against it as such but believe the level of effort involved
could be better directed.

Ok. ...

Is there nothing that that number of man,women,child hours could be
applied to which would save more of the planet?

What 'hours' Tim?

Why would it take any longer putting empty crisp packets into a
collection bin, rather than the general dustbin? It doesn't take me
any longer dropping a dead battery in the box at Sainsbury's (when I'm
going past) than it does to drop it in my own bin at home?

Mightn't it give the kids a reason to actually put the packets in a
bin rather than just poking them in your hedge on the way home?

Modern printers work pretty quickly and could print a label in a
matter of seconds ... and they can put the packets in one of the boxes
they get stuff delivered in.

And no one is suggesting anyone stop doing any other 'planet saving'
measures and this one actually earns the school rewards for their
efforts, just in the same way putting a deposit on a bottle of
lemonade or requiring a pound to release a shopping trolley did
towards getting trolleys back where they are needed.

Walkers should promote whoever is responsible! Better yet, lets us make
them prime minister:-)

This isn't *instead* of anything else, it's *as well* as everything
else and would really take no time at all so I really can't see the
issue ... and unlike many other things people could spend time on, is
a win all round. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 06:58:53 +0000 (UTC), RJH
wrote:

snip

Leaving the ground fallow and growing grass for a couple of years
and then using grazing animals for maintenance during this time may be
beneficial for the country.

But it may not, if grazing animals (even if also for milk or meat
production) takes up say 20x the land in the first place and produce
loads more methane (than say a combine harvester produces CO2).

True, and it's the land (put into) use that really hits with dairy:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46654042

Thanks for that Rob, I was wondering if there was such info available
the other night (but forgot to look for it). ;-)

Also ... "The research found meat and other animal products were
responsible for most food-related greenhouse gas emissions, despite
providing only a fifth of the calories consumed."

The Mrs and I are currently experimenting with Veganism [1] and the
Mrs is especially fine with that as I do most of the cooking and she
has no issue with anything I produce, if it's 'meat / fish substitute'
or otherwise. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[1] We are using up all our non Vegan food as / when and looking for
vegan equivalents when out shopping. Apparently Holland & Barret (we
have one locally) stock an egg substitute that can be used to make
scrambled egg. A fairly regular lunch was two poached eggs on toast
but yesterday I did us mixed beans, mushrooms and tomatoes. ;-)

On Friday, 24 January 2020 20:10:27 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:09:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:

snip


If there is a
facility that disposes of it in a less environmentally damaging way,
then you should make reasonable efforts to do that.

reasonable is the key word there. A crisp packet is of such low value that spending time washing them is entirely unreasonable.

*A* crisp packet maybe, but it doesn't take long to combine it with
many others.

But we all pay for our waste to be collected, as that is the most efficicent system for most.


Burying them in landfill is not damaging, dropping them on the beach is.

Assuming they make it to landfill, as you say, and don't end up
everywhere else.

That is the responsibility of the rubbish collection service.


You chose to buy / take / eat it, you then have to dispose of it
properly.

Now, if you can't engineer it to say drop a wodge of crisp packets
into a local drop off point, as part of your normal journey then maybe
you shouldn't buy them in the first place.

complete nonsequitur.

Only to you.

It does depend on what you mean buy local or/and convenient.

And that goes for all rubbish of any sort.
I've got a dozen or so old cans of paint. It;s about a 2 mile walk to the recycle centre. I've asked a local cab company they said No, haven't considered uber or anyone like that. So they'll stay down the back stairs and in the loft.





You're virtue-fying something of near zero value.

It's nothing to do with any 'value'.

If everyone took crisp packets to a dedicated recycler the world would be worse off, not better.

BS.

Is it better to use a car to transport such things a mile or two or
place them in the bin for landfill with so much other stuff.



& money would have been misspent achieving a purely trivial benefit.

Trivial to you I'm guessing. It's not trivial to me, my family or any
of the thousands (millions?) of people who are 'bothering.

By polluting the air with their cars. Of course I don't have a car and use the bus, which is either fuel cell or electric hybrid.

And I'm betting those with kids husing non-reusable nappies pollute more than
I do or my cat.

Those traveling to work alone are causing more pollution than my few packets of crisps, which I virtually given up on anyway.



If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

Most are part of each.







Society is grossly wasteful, but many things really are not worth repairing, repurposing etc.

'Worth' again and by whose standards?

By the user, obviously.


I took an otherwise written-off washing machine that wasn't
economically repairable (by conventional means) and repaired it and it
lasted another 8 years.

Doesn't that depend on what you did to keep it going, most old machines
of any sort are NOT energy effient.
I replaced my webcam 'server' a G4 mac tower running at about 120W
for 24/7 with a new macmin which ran at about 5-10W max and that included buring a DVD.
So was I right or wrong, well I estimated that afterc 2.5 years my mac mini would recoup the money I spent on it in saved electricity.


You may throw away something that someone else would repair, keep and
use.

That doesn't make it right. What about old car belching out fumes for the
for 10+ years keep them or replace with a electric car ?

Why do you think there are scrapaged schemes ?


And we can consider how recyclable a single use
container might be when we buy something.

Like, you can buy dog food dried in bulk, wet in tins or wet in
plastic pouches. From a quantity and recyclability POV, the plastic
pouches are worse than the tins and large paper sacks.

Not all food in the same, I buy pouches they are less wasteful than tins
food wise.


It's not inherently wrong to bury waste.

That can very much depend on the waste.

In many cases it's currently our best option.

Ah, and that is another topic. ;-)

It takes 'people' to push for change and we hear today that Tesco are
no longer using / selling plastic wrapped multipacks. Once the big
outlets like Tesco stop using such, the manufacturers will stop doing
it and so stop offering it to the other supermarkets.

That is the way to go I assume that they'll wrap them in something hopefully
recyclable card. But tehn again why do people expect muli-packs ?
Get rid of the idea, for get 2-4-1 etc.


Sainsbury's sell reusable net bags for you to put / weigh your own
loose produce in. Once people get use to that I dare say they will
stop supplying any fruit / veg in plastic bags, in the way they have
by charging for carrier bags.

It's a nice idea but how long will these net bags last and are the recyclable.
I used to buy things in such bags which weren't recclable and had to go
in the landfill bin including the plastic tabs.


Foiled plastic pouches use far less material per 4 pouches than 1 metal tin.

Maybe, but if it takes 6 x the energy to recycle the foil pouches (and
we should till be build a catapult big enough to launch such waste
into the sun g) then the tin wins.

So don;t recyclle them.

So as with crips packets is it worth the car pulltion created to take them to be recycled + the energy for recycling ?




And there are other differences that far outweigh that issue.

Such as?

cleaning, bleaching, transporting.

I did hear that some northerners were using crip packets as condoms.




I'm all for better handling of the waste stream, I think what we do now is lousy, but so many people prioritise trivial waste matters far above their real worth, and that is a pointless cost, not a virtue.

I'm sure they will / do, but something is better than nothing,

Not always.

even if
it's not the best thing, as long as it's done correctly.

That is also a point that needs considering.


It is so easy to increase recycling rate that with all the talk about it I have to wonder exactly why it's not being done.

Because of the same thing that fuels most of the issues we suffer as a
society, greed, ignorance and selfishness.

Well we could stop all motor racing sports. We could perhaps ban cars
from city centre for a star and the the outskirts.

We could refuse to employ people that lived further away than they could walk
or get public transport or cycle to/from.
Or find the best car which I've heard costs about £60k and if you can't afford it tough luck, yuor not allowed to own a car.
Stop all holiday travel by plane at least.

Have curfews saing electric light.

But just how far do you go with this ?




Does someone have zero brains, or does no-one even care?

I'm sure a bit of both, but many people do care, even if they don't
have the brains or skills to find out what's the best thing for
themselves.

Yes we could ban the printing of books to stop paper waste.


Our Council gives out very clear leaflets (though every door)
describing in simple terms what things are wanted in the recycling
bins, what things aren't and how to process them.

yes that is confusing though. I've just gone over from red label T-bags
to clipper as red label has plastic cost is more than double.

There's a confusing code on most things which could be simplier,
even the wheelie bins come in differnt colours depending on the borough,
if they can't standerdise on those what hope is there ?


I would say at least 50% of the bins we pass when walking the dog in
some way fall foul of the 'rules' and so either don't get collected or
contaminate / de-value the waste stream.

Actually I'd say it's higher from what I've seen.
But do you really need a dog ?, no dog would mean less food and packaging
food producion etc.

Would you be prepared not to have a dog for the betterment of mankind ?



As you ask, are these people actually thick? Are we asking too much of
them with the instruction, 'Take the top off the milk bottle before
putting it in the recycling box',

Why don;t they use the same plastic for top and bottem ?

or 'flatten all cardboard boxes' ...
because these people simply can't understand *why* they have been
requested so?

Will they remove the greased up bits from pizza boxes.

Or is it they CBA to take the responsibility for their
own waste in a way that allows the council to keep their rates down?

My council have just broken the lid of my recycle bin and it blows around in the wind and lets the rain in, not sure when they'll replace it. But to I have to tell them or can the bin men see the bin is broken ?
What do I do with the stuff that is sometimes recylcable depending on the councils equipment and how do I know, it's not a binary thing you know.

Most of my studetns are very wasteful, thowing components away or just leaving them laying about, I've tried to get the department to do something about it but they won't.

Last time we bought 30 scopes they came with two power leads 1 of UK 1 for USA
I had to bin the USA ones in the non-recycle bin.





Maybe schools should dump religious education and replace them with
classes on *Why* we all need to be a good citizens?

Can you imagine the uproar from religous people.
But I do think RE could be useful as a subject explaining religions
from around the world and why they exist and how stupid they are ;-D



Cheers, T i m

On Friday, 24 January 2020 23:22:36 UTC, T i m wrote:


This video gives a bit of an insight how Tetra Paks are preprocessed
and the things they are turned into (in India at least from 10 years
ago):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzWv...ature=youtu.be

How efficient do you think it is to send our Tetra Paks to india,
even by sea.

I guess we could swap them for doctors wieght for wieght


https://www.theguardian.com/environm...and-corruption

On Monday, 27 January 2020 15:33:12 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 24 January 2020 20:10:27 UTC, T i m wrote:

If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

Most are part of each.

Most of us are part of some solutions & some problems. But these days we're also part of a host of imaginary problems.

On 25/01/2020 18:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 18:11:57 +0000, ARW
wrote:

snip

Now, where *does* all that paint go ... ?


No idea where the paint goes?

Strange?

I was wondering how you can walk carrying
such a big chip on your shoulder.

I can walk fine Adam (broad shoulders and thanks for asking) and I'm
glad to hear I'm living rent free in your head. ;-)

We having fun yet?


You would not know fun if it sat on your face.


--
Adam

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 20:14:31 +0000, ARW
wrote:

snip

You would not know fun if it sat on your face.

Here Adam, you like quizzes, what fun film was this line from ...

"After a brief adjustment period, and a bunch of alcohol, it's a
face... I'd be happy to sit on."

Cheers, T i m

On Monday, 27 January 2020 16:20:21 UTC, wrote:
On Monday, 27 January 2020 15:33:12 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 24 January 2020 20:10:27 UTC, T i m wrote:

If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

Most are part of each.

Most of us are part of some solutions & some problems. But these days we're also part of a host of imaginary problems.

T i m is not an imaginary problem, or is he ;-)